Friday, September 27, 2013

This week we found out his plan to bring the self-fulfilling
prophecy to fruition. It came in the
form of three announcements starting Monday that outlined a platform strategy
centered around the much speculated about SteamBox.

Monday we found out about SteamOS. A linux based operating system that forms the
foundation of the SteamBox strategy. SteamOS promises
to stream Windows and Mac games from other PC's (Kind of like Nvidia's Shield)
and natively support Linux games. Valve
has purportedly been working with hardware vendors and game developers to take
advantage of the new platform and claims "significant performance increases in graphics processing."

Taking aim at existing and upcoming consoles it also
promises support for Music, TV and movies and socialization utilizing existing
Steam client mechanisms.

Wednesday brought the announcement of an actual hardware
platform or should I say "platforms."
"SteamMachines" are described as, "...a
variety of Steam gaming machines...all of them running SteamOS."

300 Steam users will be selected to participate in a
SteamBox beta program utilizing prototype hardware. Specifics about the hardware weren't
released but it appears Beta participants will not be under any non-disclosure
restrictions with Valve stating, "...that
really is the whole point. The input from testers should come in many forms:
bug reports, forum posts, concept art, 3D prints, haikus, and also very
publicly stated opinions"

Friday brought the final announcement. The last piece of the SteamBox puzzle was
revealed to be the introduction of a new controller. The SteamController resembles a standard game controller but will be wireless (except for the beta), contain a small
touchscreen in the center of the controller flanked by two trackpads in place
of traditional gamepad controls.

Valve claims the device will mimic the operation of a
keyboard and mouse and touts the advancements in control using haptics. Haptics is a method of providing feedback via
small electromagnets to aid in the "feel" of control using a
trackpad.

So what have we got...

Well, since SteamOS is going to be open and hackable we
basically have a new Linux Distro. Considering Ubuntu is the only platform that Steam currently works with reliably, I
wonder how long it will be before someone coins the term,
"SteamBuntu."

Oops, maybe I just did...

The SteamBox or "Steam Machines" seems like a
dodge. The Beta program is awfully small
and the SteamOS is not being publicly released yet. It sounds more like a recommended
configuration than an actual product.

The "Steam Controller"......... is a joke. I don't care how cool it looks...

I'm sorry, but trackpads
make for poor game controllers for the same reason that your predictive
keyboard on your smartphone sucks for writing blog posts. There's a disconnect that can't be resolved
by any combination of shimmy, shake or resistance in a trackpad.

It appears to be more of an exercise in design than
utility. Valve is quick to point out
that you can still use your current mouse or keyboard with the new OS and
Hardware platforms.

There's nothing revolutionary here and too many questions
answered with glittering generalities.
Let's also be mindful that the whole platform is "open"
meaning Valve hasn't really committed to anything but a loose
specification.

The solution to Windows and Mac games is streaming them from
another PC in your house? Not exactly
original or ideal. Latency from wireless
controllers is bad enough, imagine processing an entire game.

What about virtualization?
What about emulation? The only compatibility
fix was hosting OnLive at home? The hype
isn't living up to the reality and Valve will have to do a whole lot better
than what they're offering now. Linux
still has only 1.52% of market share on desktops where most major titles are
played outside of the consoles.

These new Steam branded offerings are likely destined to
fail because they aren't really so much a platform as a specification. It's not a PC, it's not a console and it's
not offering anything we haven't seen before.

Monday, September 23, 2013

The concatenation of the words "Free" and
"Premium." A contradiction of
terms to be sure. The best things in
life may be free but rarely do they rate the label of premium.

You may have heard the big announcementfrom Blizzard last week about the imminent departure of Diablo 3's auction
houses on March 18th (2014.) For the
uninitiated, there are currently both cash and in-game currency options for
acquiring loot via the auction marketplace.
For many players it became a viable alternative to actually playing the
game to acquire your goodies.

Problem was, it seems the best stuff ended up being
bought not found. Like many recent
triple-A titles (Like Borderlands 2) it's often more productive to buy your way
to the top than rely on the often disappointing loot drops. That set the stage for Blizzard's auction
house problem. A whole communitysprang up
alongside Diablo 3 whose sole purpose was to capitalize on Blizzard's naiveté.

"When
we initially designed and implemented the auction houses, the driving goal was
to provide a convenient and secure system for trades. But as we've mentioned on
different occasions, it became increasingly clear that despite the benefits of
the AH system and the fact that many players around the world use it, it
ultimately undermines Diablo's core game play" Blizzard

Blizzard's grand idea to short circuit the practice of
players buying and selling upgraded characters on EBay (and Blizzard not getting their cut) ended up being a "short-circuited
core reward loop."

Ever since its inception,
Diablo 3's auction house has been accused of being just another example of
"pay to win." It created a
market that's become a cornerstone of the free to play revenue model with
returns that would make a stock broker jealous.

But Diablo 3 wasn't free, in
fact it was one of those "Triple-A" titles that was going to set you
back at least $60. Depending on your
level of fandom that could go as high as $150 for the Collector's Edition.

That's a pretty high price
of admission just to be treated like a Team Fortress 2 player.

If a game is decent and comes
without a price tag then chances are you're going to be asked to buy something
along the way if you want more than just the basics. There's nothing wrong with that but what if you've
already paid upfront for the privilege?

It's the classic argument against
DLC. Games like Battlefield 3,
Borderlands and Crysis offer upgraded equipment, a raise in level caps and
other advantages only paid DLC or upgrades can provide. In some cases unbalancing the experience for
those who choose to spend their money more wisely.

But what happened with
Diablo 3 is something far worse.

Intentional or not it's taken
greed to the next level in the industry with the careless structuring of
Diablo's auction system. Even amongst
the claims of it only being intended as a place for players to trade items, the
reality was quite different.

When you introduce a profit
motive unrelated to the game itself, opportunists will be ready to fleece the
faithful. That's why Blizzard shut down
the EBay sales and moved them into its own ecosystem. What Blizzard didn't count on was rampant
capitalism to turn on them. When it
became apparent that the game was rapidly becoming an arms race based on how
much you could pay the faithful began to lose faith.

After all, why buy a DLC
pack promising better items if they can be undercut by the unruly mobs of the
auction house. Gamers got wise and now
Blizzard looks stupid.

The core problem is the
mistaken belief that a publisher can treat a triple-A title as though it were a
freemium offering like Plants Vs Zombies
2 or Simpson's Tap Out. More to the point, that anyone would put up
with it for long is an insult to everyone's intelligence.

But it's just a game
right? Of course it is but it seems like
we never get what we're promised unless we keep paying. Extras are fine but don't screw up the basics
in the process guys.

It's like going to a movie
and 10 minutes before it ends the lights go up and the ushers came around
demanding another $10 to see the finale.

Personally, I'm getting a
little tired of games trying to have their own ecosystems. If the extra content is that great then it
either should have already been in the game or been put into a sequel.

If a game needs all this
periphery crap to be successful then maybe it isn't that good to start with.

Saturday, September 21, 2013

Let's take a trip back to 1993 when cyborgs were all the rage and Windows 95 was still a rumor!This is Bullfrog's Real Time Strategy game from 1993 called Syndicate. Quite an accomplishment for a DOS game with mouse control and decent graphics for its time.

Friday, September 20, 2013

Numbers, that's all those are and by themselves
meaningless. So let's add some context.

1.52% is your number if the PC you're reading this on
happens to be running Linux.

7.28% if
it's got "Mac" somewhere on its badge and 91 for pretty much everyone
else in the world running some flavor of Windows made in the past 10 years.

Oh yeah and 2.46% for you weird people still
running BEOS and OS/2.

So what? Those
numbers haven't changed much in the past decade or so. But wait!
Ol' Gabe's at it again.

This week
at the 2013 LinuxConValve chief Gabe Newell proclaimed that Linux
is the "Future of Gaming!" among other things.

He bases his belief on what he deems closed and incompatible
ecosystems across gaming platforms from the likes of Sony, Microsoft and
Nintendo. Linux will apparently put an
end to all of that by embracing a more "open" and collaborative gaming
experience. "Blurring the
line" between gamer and developer.

He also pointed to the release of the Steam Client for Linux
in February this year and the 198 games currently available. Exciting titles like "Euro Truck
Simulator", "Towns" and a port of the now 4 year old zombie
shooter "Left for Dead 2." By
the way, if you've got a version of Linux that isn't based on Ubuntu, good luck
getting the client to work.

Bemoaning the "friction" of getting his wares on
traditional and mobile platforms was another barb hurled by Newell at the likes
of Apple's App Store certification process.

Thing is, if Linux is the future of gaming in your living
room, why does the platform have less market share than the "other"
category of Desktop OS's? (1.52% to "other's"
2.46%)

Claiming that many of the world's game servers run Linux is
one thing but actually playing a game on Linux is quite another. Oh, and that whole thing about game servers
running Linux? A quick glance at Steam's
own forums belies Newell's claims of greater stability and access. Any regular user of Steam whose lost their
saved games due to "cloud sync" can attest to that.

Trying to make the
platform more user friendly with the release of customized libraries,
interaction with hardware developers and the eventual emergence of Steam
branded hardware will help but there's still a problem.

It's that whole "open" thing.

As distasteful as it may be for him to admit it, Newell will
have to recreate a very Microsoft like ecosystem for his ambitions to bear
fruit. At some point to make Linux gaming
commercially viable he'll have to tighten the reins to move things along. Which means less democracy (aka Mob rule)
and more tyranny in the eyes of the open source community.

It's the same problem that's plagued open source since its
conception. Everyone has a vote and if
they don't like it they can go do something else. That's fine but it also leads to a splintered
platform with devotees to branches defending "their way" with an
almost cultish fanaticism. In the end
it leaves users confused and weary. The
open source world has to face facts and stop developing for eachother and start
taking "real" users into account.
Quite a hurdle for the APT-Get and RPM types.

That's why after 2 decades Linux is still not a player on
the desktop. It's also why Newell will
have to step on a few toes to have any hope of Linux gaming even being a
tertiary choice.

Thus the world of
Linux Gaming has largely been limited to minor titles and either emulated or
buggy ports of Windows games.

The current offerings for Linux are primarily translated from
other platforms like Windows or indie wares
that rarely rise above the level of a cult classic. Being a game developer, Valve is certainly in
a position to add content to the Linux platform but aside from a few hits like
Half Life and Portal the company isn't exactly known for pumping out
blockbusters on a regular basis. Which
is a big reason why you don't see many triple-A titles on the Linux side of
Steam.

Another reason? Let's
face it, Linux has less than 2% market share on the desktop. Mobile platforms are hostile to Steam and the
only chance of increasing market share for Linux gaming is to produce....what?

Of course, a gaming console.
One that will have to be as reigned in and locked down as any Xbox or
Playstation. One that cannot be just
another homebrew PC running a weird Linux distro like MythTV.

Warning Linux faithful, you may have a wolf in your midst. The sad thing for you is that it may be your
only chance to have a decent gaming experience.

Sunday, September 15, 2013

The first is from the new DLC for Grid 2 called Demolotion Derby which is actually a carryover from the original Race Driver: Grid.

The Second is a trip back to 1994 to LucasArt's X-Wing courtesy of the latest (.74) version of DOSBox. Even my USB joystick works and you get the MIDI music as well. Quite a treat if you want to play a classic PC game without digging up old hardware.